4

I am curious about the strongest computable methods we currently know of that can allow us to possibly discover (arithmetical) unsoundness or nonstandardness in a foundational system $S$ that interprets at least ACA (such as Z). Detecting (arithmetical) inconsistency is 'easy'; $S$ is inconsistent iff $S$ proves (the translation of) $0=1$, so it suffices to look for such a proof. This is a $Σ_1$-quest. But detecting unsoundness (or nonstandardness) is harder. More precisely: $ \def\con{\text{Con}} $

What are the best $Σ_1$-methods currently known for detecting (arithmetical) unsoundness of a (computable) formal system $S$ that interprets ACA, where the "$Σ_1$" means that the method can be (ideally) implemented as a computer program whose termination indicates detection of unsoundness? Ideally, if the method yields a positive detection, then $S$ must be unsound. But I would be satisfied if a positive detection only implies nonstandardness (i.e. $S$ has no ω-model).

For example, here are three possible methods (where "$\square Q$" is the arithmetic sentence that captures "$S$ proves $Q$"):

  1. Search for a proof of $(¬Q∧\square Q)$ over every arithmetical sentence $Q$. If such a proof is found, then $S$ cannot be $Σ_1$-sound, otherwise $S$ would prove $Q$ and hence a contradiction. Note that $PA' := PA+¬\con(PA)$ is consistent but proves $¬\con(PA')$, so $S$ can be consistent and yet prove $\square {⊥}$. Indeed, this method finds that $PA'$ proves $(¬{⊥}∧\square {⊥})$, so it successfully identifies it as $Σ_1$-unsound. But it fails to discover $Σ_1$-sound systems that are $Σ_2$-unsound.

  2. Search for a proof of $∃\overline{Q}(Σ_n(Q)∧¬T_n(Q)∧\square Q)$, where $T_n$ is a truth-predicate over $S$ for $Σ_n$-sentences (i.e. $S$ proves $(Q⇔T_n(Q))$ for every $Σ_n$-sentence $Q$), over every (standard) natural $n$. Note that this method subsumes the previous one, because if $S$ proves $(¬A∧\square A)$ for some arithmetical sentence $A$, then $A$ is a $Σ_k$-sentence for some natural $k$ and is coded by some numeral $c$, so $S$ proves $(Σ_k(A)∧¬T_k(A)∧\square A)$ in which $A$ is represented by the term $c$, and hence also proves $∃\overline{Q}(Σ_n(Q)∧¬T_n(Q)∧\square Q)$.

  3. Search for a proof of ( $S$ is arithmetically unsound ). Unlike the previous methods, which can be used for formal systems that interpret just PA, this method needs a bit more (which is why I stated ACA in my question). We can express ( $Q$ is a true arithmetical sentence ) as ( there is winning strategy for Verifier against Falsifier on $Q$ under game semantics for FOL ), where a strategy is a mapping from game states to a move for the current player in that state, and a winning strategy for Verifier is a strategy such that every game play in which Verifier follows the strategy ends in a win for Verifier. I believe that this method subsumes the previous ones, but I cannot really tell.

But are there even stronger methods possible?

I also have some related side questions that have absolute true/false answers:

(A) Is there a (computable) formal system that interprets ACA and is (arithmetically) unsound but is not detected by method 2 (i.e. fails to proves its own $Σ_n$-unsoundness for any standard numeral $n$).

(B) Is there a (computable) formal system that interprets ACA and is (arithmetically) sound but is detected by method 3 (i.e. proves its own unsoundness)?

I think the answer to both side questions is yes, but I do not know how to go about constructing such systems. Does anyone have any ideas?

user21820
  • 57,693
  • 9
  • 98
  • 256
  • 2
    Re: side question (A), suppose the answer were negative. Then in particular, a sentence $\varphi$ is false iff the computable theory $\mathsf{ACA+\varphi}$ proves its own $\Sigma_n$-unsoundness for some $n$. But this is a c.e. condition, contradicting the non-c.e.-ness of true arithmetic. For (B), since $\Sigma_n$-soundness is an arithmetic condition, no arithmetically sound theory can prove its own arithmetic unsoundness. – Noah Schweber Jan 01 '22 at 03:46
  • @NoahSchweber: Thank you! I didn't realize (A) was so simple. But I do not get your answer for (B); $Σ_n$-soundness is arithmetical for any standard numeral $n$, but I can't see how full arithmetical soundness is. Suppose $S$ proves itself unsound. Then $S$ proves that it is $Σ_k$-unsound for some $k$, but this $k$ is internal so it may not be represented by a standard numeral. What am I missing? – user21820 Jan 01 '22 at 05:03
  • 1
    Whoops, sorry for the late reply. I think that's correct, I misinterpreted your question (but I'll think more about (B)). – Noah Schweber Jan 15 '22 at 05:01
  • @NoahSchweber: Thank you very much! And if you have any other ideas about specific statements to detect unsoundness of any kind, I'd be interested to know as well! From what I can tell, all 3 methods I gave would detect non-existence of a ω-model. In particular, if my conjecture for (B) holds then we can have a system that is arithmetically sound but fails to have an ω-model! However, I don't know how to construct such a system. – user21820 Jan 15 '22 at 09:02

0 Answers0